Jan 29, 2008 00:23
16 yrs ago
French term
doublés
French to English
Law/Patents
Human Resources
employment contract
I've worked in big companies myself but this one has me stumped, or at best confused. This section sets out the basis on which managerial staff are awarded an annual bonus: "Les cadres de grade x ont droit à une cible de % de leur salaire régulier basé sur des objectifs financiers de 60% pouvant être **doublés** et sur des objectifs personnels de 40% ne pouvant pas être **doublés**." Any ideas?
Proposed translations
(English)
4 +3 | exceeded | Becky Heaviside (X) |
5 | increased / exceeded | Chris Hall |
2 +2 | matched | TesCor - |
2 +1 | which may double | MatthewLaSon |
2 | NFG | Charlie Bavington |
Proposed translations
+3
1 hr
exceeded
Declined
doubler can be synonymous with dépasser
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Michael H G (X)
33 mins
|
agree |
B D Finch
: i.e. the financial targets can be exceeded, but the personal ones cannot.
8 hrs
|
agree |
Red Cat Studios
9 hrs
|
1 hr
increased / exceeded
Declined
Is synonymous with both 'augmenter' and 'dépasser'...
+2
1 hr
matched
Declined
I'm wondering if it means that the percentage can be matched by the employer. However, your sentence clearly states that it's the objectives that can be "doublés". Could there be a grammatical error?
Peer comment(s):
agree |
writeaway
: makes sense and I trust that as a Canadian you are is a good position to know.
6 hrs
|
agree |
Charlie Bavington
: Seems a definite possibility. Ultimately boils down to profit sharing, more or less, which I believe is a statutory obligation under some circumstances, which adds weight to this suggestion.
10 hrs
|
+1
1 hr
which may double
Declined
Hello,
I think that "doublé" is too be taken literally here.
pouvant être doublé = which could double
I hope this helps.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2008-01-29 02:09:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
http://www.secinfo.com/dpD93.3z.d.htm
I think that "doublé" is too be taken literally here.
pouvant être doublé = which could double
I hope this helps.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr (2008-01-29 02:09:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
http://www.secinfo.com/dpD93.3z.d.htm
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Najib Aloui
: "doubler", when it's used for quantities, always, always means to be given strictly twice the value.
5 hrs
|
Merci Najib! C'est ce que je pensais.
|
14 hrs
NFG
Declined
Just to avoid posting 3 or 4 "ask askers" again :-)
OK, so if it doesnt mean doubled = matched. what else could it mean?
That if you sneak past your "financial target" by a single centime, your bonus will be double in comparison to your colleague who hits his financial target on the nail? Doesn't sound very fair. Or very likely, TBH.
I have in fact worked under a fairly similar scheme, if I did my bit I got X, if the company did OK I got Y, and the company also matched Y with an extra payment (sadly, this went into my pension, not my pocket, much to the union's ire, but there were tax advantages or something). Sounds similar.
I just don't get all this vague "exceeded" stuff.
a) why not use "depasser" instead of the fairly specific "doubler" (OK, we've said the author may not be Moliere !)?
b) what, specifically does "exceeded" mean? How much? Paid by whom? This is a contract of employment. Are they really just saying "you might get more"?
It may be clumsily expressed, but it must *mean* something pretty specific to be in a contract, IMHO. Doubled is specific. Your notion that the bonus "may end up being more"... well, kinda isn't :-)
I'm pretty sure it DOES mean doubled. Whether it's doubled by the company.... OK, that isn't clear.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 16 hrs (2008-01-29 17:23:20 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Clarification: "similar scheme" in para 2 above = scheme where employer matched part of bous. Not a scheme ("unfair") as outlined in para 1.
Y'know, sometimes you just have to apply the crap in crap out rule, I find.
If the guy has said "doubled", & (without an explanation from the client) I can think of a way that "doubled" makes sense that I could justify if asked, I'd put doubled.
If the guy says "doubled" and I can't think of a way how that would work, I'd put doubled (sic).
When something is pretty badly phrased, and you're not in a position to "improve" the text (i.e. you don't know exactly what's going on), you sometimes just have to put what it says. I believe, anyway.
At least if you put "doubled", it is hard for the client to turn round and say "you imbecile, how wrong could you be"? :-)
'Tis my opinion, your mileage may vary...
OK, so if it doesnt mean doubled = matched. what else could it mean?
That if you sneak past your "financial target" by a single centime, your bonus will be double in comparison to your colleague who hits his financial target on the nail? Doesn't sound very fair. Or very likely, TBH.
I have in fact worked under a fairly similar scheme, if I did my bit I got X, if the company did OK I got Y, and the company also matched Y with an extra payment (sadly, this went into my pension, not my pocket, much to the union's ire, but there were tax advantages or something). Sounds similar.
I just don't get all this vague "exceeded" stuff.
a) why not use "depasser" instead of the fairly specific "doubler" (OK, we've said the author may not be Moliere !)?
b) what, specifically does "exceeded" mean? How much? Paid by whom? This is a contract of employment. Are they really just saying "you might get more"?
It may be clumsily expressed, but it must *mean* something pretty specific to be in a contract, IMHO. Doubled is specific. Your notion that the bonus "may end up being more"... well, kinda isn't :-)
I'm pretty sure it DOES mean doubled. Whether it's doubled by the company.... OK, that isn't clear.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 16 hrs (2008-01-29 17:23:20 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Clarification: "similar scheme" in para 2 above = scheme where employer matched part of bous. Not a scheme ("unfair") as outlined in para 1.
Y'know, sometimes you just have to apply the crap in crap out rule, I find.
If the guy has said "doubled", & (without an explanation from the client) I can think of a way that "doubled" makes sense that I could justify if asked, I'd put doubled.
If the guy says "doubled" and I can't think of a way how that would work, I'd put doubled (sic).
When something is pretty badly phrased, and you're not in a position to "improve" the text (i.e. you don't know exactly what's going on), you sometimes just have to put what it says. I believe, anyway.
At least if you put "doubled", it is hard for the client to turn round and say "you imbecile, how wrong could you be"? :-)
'Tis my opinion, your mileage may vary...
Discussion
(?)